Re: Retiring WITHOUT_CXX
- In reply to: Warner Losh : "Re: Retiring WITHOUT_CXX"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 21:47:38 UTC
On Nov 26, 2021, at 9:45 AM, Warner Losh <email@example.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 10:11 AM Rodney W. Grimes < > firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > >> >> You can disagree with my assertion, but I shall continue to assert >> that it *seems* as if rather than adding B O S to the CI such that >> it is not only regularly tested, but continuously tested is the >> correct path forward here. > > > Testing all possible options takes on the order days. Testing all > possible combinations takes much longer. It's not practical to test > them all on every commit. It's computationally difficult. Would it make sense to define a number of option sets and test only those? This would reduce the test load from testing 2^N option sets to a much smaller number. I suspect *useful* combinations are far fewer than 2^N. > We do have to stop and consider the bigger picture: is it an option > that's useful enough to have it be one of the subset of things we test > on a regular basis, and enforce some sort of pre-commit requirements > for. Or is it an option we're content to test after the fact and have some > sane plan for remediation? Or is it an option that we've slavishly > carried forward from a time where it made a lot of sense to a time where > the situation on the ground is such that it no longer makes sense? It appears the following in /usr/src have .cc files: [ls **/*.cc|sed 's,/[^/]*$,,'|uniq] cddl/usr.sbin/zfsd cddl/usr.sbin/zfsd/tests cddl/usr.sbin/zfsd contrib/bsnmp/tests contrib/capsicum-test contrib/googletest/googlemock/src contrib/googletest/googlemock/test contrib/googletest/googletest/codegear contrib/googletest/googletest/samples contrib/googletest/googletest/src contrib/googletest/googletest/test contrib/googletest/googletest/xcode/Samples/FrameworkSample contrib/libcbor/oss-fuzz contrib/libcxxrt contrib/libucl/examples contrib/netbsd-tests/lib/libc/sync crypto/openssh/regress/misc/fuzz-harness lib/csu/tests lib/libc/tests/stdlib lib/libdevdctl lib/libdevdctl/tests lib/libnv/tests lib/libpmc sbin/devd tests/sys/fs/fusefs tools/tools/mcgrab tools/tools/mctest usr.bin/dtc usr.bin/users usr.sbin/pmc Looks like a lot of the .cc files are required for testing (that most users won't care about). I was surprised to see .cc files in lib/libc/tests/stdlib! There are only two .cc files here. lib/libpmc has just one. googletest's README.md says: Welcome to **Google Test**, Google's C++ test framework! If it will help I can rewrite devd in C, and may be more. I have a very small program that converts .dtb files to .dts. Adding a parser for .dts files wouldn't be hard (with usr.bin/dtc as a reference). Not trivial but doable. > That's the discussion we're having here. Is it important enough to require > everybody to pay attention to it or not... > > Warner